i am not gog downtown standing in line to cash it. i know where my money is, because it is in my pocket. i got more time with my daughter, we got places to go. [ freeman ] go open a new world, with visa prepaid. more people go with visa. [ male announcer ] available at rushcard.com. i'm chris hayes. in his weekly address, president obama urged the senate to confirm his appointments of mary jo white to head securities and exchange committee. in bangladesh police say a fire in a garment factory killed six female workers and injured another five. that's just months after more than 100 people died in another factory fire there.

first, my story of the week, hope and climate change. i will admit, as i watch the president's inaugural address on monday morning, i was definitely not expecting this. >> we will respond to the threat of climate change. knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations. some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires and crippling drought. and more powerful storms. the path toward sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult. but america cannot resist this transition. we must lead it. >> you'll recall with the exception of a single line in his dnc speech, our current state of climate peril was barely mentioned in the campaign. in fact, it was the first time in 24 years it was never raised at any of the debates. so, i was not the only

commentator who was surprised to find such a passionate, lengthy passage in his speech. a speech, of course, is just that. often we have a tendency to overestimate just how much presidential rhetoric can accomplish. right after the speech the new york times ran an article with the headline, speech gives climate goal center stage. president obama masetting in motion what democrats say will be a deliberate pace, aggressive campaign built around use of executive powers to sidestep congressional opposition. libertarian author gene healey coined it cult of the, a quasi figure, directing the nation's attention and resources at a whim. and in the sphere of national security that is increasingly what we actually have. but when it comes to domestic and economic policy the president isn't really the most pressing issue. if you were to start listing the

obstacles to climate progress in order you start with the major fossil fuel companies themselves, the noise machine that has converted it into cultural issue, house republican caucus which unanimously committed to the deprave denialism, and senate republicans who killed the last big climate bill, and then democrats who say they care about climate change but wouldn't go along with the fill buster to make a bill a reality. only after that you would get to president barack obama. for this reason it's per verse to focus climate policy exclusively on the president. but barack obama is also the most powerful person in the world who says he's committed to averting climate disaster. with acknowledging that comes some responsibilities. it turns out that even short of congressional action there are a number of extremely significant things the executive branch could do to reduce emissions,

develop alternatives and move us closer to the radical transformation of our industrial life we must have very, very soon. environmental protection agency has the legal authority to begin regulating carbon under the clean air act. no need for congressional approval. executive branch is such a massive purchaser of energy vehicles it could use that to create new vibrant markets for clean energy. they have the ability to block keystone xl pipeline. if that pipeline is built, it means a huge new source of emissions out into the foreseeable future. the cliche about second presidential terms, one which i think a good deal of truth to it, is that in the second term a president's attention turns to leaving a legacy. and i am almost certain that 50 or 100 years from now the only issue that will really matter to people is what we did about the climate. right now i'm joined by phaedra

ellis-lamkin, green for all. paul bledsoe, clinton white house climate change task force. francis beinecke, president of national resources defense council and ta-nehisi coates. good morning. >> good morning. >> i was surprised about that speech. were you? >> surprised and excited. we were hoping to get the president's commitment. he made it very strongly. this was not a one line or two words climate change. eight sentences, policy, commitment. >> you're counting the sentences there, that's -- >> we're no longer counting the words. that's progress. counting the words for four years, now we're onto -- i think it was a very bold commitment on his part. if you were there, i know phaedra was there, paul was, you

probably were. the cheer rippled down the mall. >> if only those were the people that determined the future of our climate policy. >> that's true, but they are the base. i think you have to move from the base out. >> i want to get to a series of substantive issues about what exactly -- when we get to brass tacks about what the president can do. we know the republican house isn't just -- isn't going to vote for anything. before we get to that, one thing you hear from advocates a lot on climate and a lot of other things is he needs to use the bully pulpit. he needs to get out there and talk about it explicitly. ta-nehisi, you think the effect of ret ring among cult of the savvy of journalist, that it can move things. >> yeah, i -- there's a lot of research that shows you can give up and give a speech and guarantee something will be passed. that's not how rhetoric works. i live in new york city.

we have experienced, since i've been here, a blackout in '04, two hurricanes, power issues every time. last time i had this, i had this great haunting feeling, okay, this is just the way things are going to be. nothing is actually going to happen. and i'm -- i'm part of that base, right? i'll throw my biases out there. a cynicism creeps in. when you hear like the president get up and say something like that, you say, okay, i can do something about this, maybe we can actually do something. people underestimate pow presidential science just depresses the base, you get into this cynicism and you say, the process can't do anything -- >> in fact, the president's rhetoric isn't persuasion -- >> no, i think persuasion is way overstated. >> right. he can't actually bring people around. it's keeping the energy and investment addition. >> i think it really does motivate people because they know he's going to lead. they're going to come behind. >> do you feel that way,

phaedra? >> yes. i guess i'm not as excited about the speech. i'm more excited about action and how people's lives change. so, if there were incredible support for the administrator lisa jackson, if we had seen new standards around air or water, in some ways if his speech had said, i'm going to use executive power, i'm going to support this type of leader in environmental protection agency, i think that would have been a greater sign of change. actually feel like we've been living off rhetoric, not living off change. so i think the base was excited to hear, it but i think part of what i think the -- i think the political establishment will better understand is that rhetoric got him re-elected with the guarantee that there would be some action. >> now, can i put out a really, really just dumb question here to the panel? the thing you just listed, why that not happen the first time? >> some of it did. the president promulgated regulation on future power plants, limiting emissions they could put out. >> and they're quite stran gent.

>> passed the strongest fuel economy standards in history. my view is the president has a massive political opportunity because of climate change impacts. people are now feeling them in their lives, in their neighborhoods and in their lively hoods. it's affecting our economy already. major insurance studies show this. when i was working for president clinton, we had to talk about climate change in future tense. now president obama can talk about it in presence tenst tens. that's huge. >> him talking about the storms and fires, because to me the only hope we have, and it's a bizarre grim hope, is that actually the effects of climate change are happening faster than people anticipated. and they are happening now and we are seeing them and it's a tangible thing we can confront as opposed to our grandchildren who nobody really cares --

>> we need to bring the country together over this issue. why the issue has become partisan, it's very complicated. part of it is -- >> it's not that complicated. >> actually, it is complicated. what happened is the administration came up with a cap and trade proposal before the great recession happened. and then they stuck with it even in the face of the worst economy in 75 years. that was a political mistake. the reason is it radicalized everybody against us. >> that's totally wrong. >> they could have passed a clean energy standard in the senate. it went begging. it could have been on the books right now. could have had a massive effect. but the over -- i think the president overreached in trying to push through a tax in the middle of the worst economy. and what it did was it radicalized the republicans and made them see political opportunity. now, i think the pendulum can swing back. it's important to recognize there is a lot of work to do out -- >> can i --

>> that's a different senator conference than i remember as someone who worked on clean energy standards. we had this conclusion we should be doing clean energy standards. i think it's important to just say, there wasn't enough capacity. we all tried really hard. we invested. we learned some lessons. we wished the president would have been stronger but i think he did to the extent he could. but i think it was a bad congress and a bad senate who didn't take leadership and we shouldn't pretend it was anything but the most insane group of people we'd ever seen -- >> sometimes half a loaf is more important -- >> no, let me say one last thing. i think it's morally per verse to excullpate someone like lindsey graham who knows it's happening, says he's for cap and trade, and then stick a knife -- >> yes, yes. >> hold that thought. i want to come back to the gap between rhetoric and reality after a quick break. for legal m? maybe you want to incorporate a business. or protect your family with a will or living trust. and you'd like the help of an attorney. at legalzoom a legal plan attorney is available

in most states with every personalized document to answer questions. get started at legalzoom.com today. and now you're protected. i'd like to thank eating right, whole grain, multigrain cheerios! mom, are those my jeans? [ female announcer ] people who choose more whole grain tend to weigh less than those who don't. multigrain cheerios you know who you are. you can part a crowd, without saying a word...

if you have yet to master the quiet sneeze... you stash tissues like a squirrel stashes nuts... well muddlers, muddle no more. try zyrtec®. it gives you powerful allergy relief. and zyrtec® is different than claritin® because zyrtec® starts working at hour one on the first day you take it. claritin® doesn't start working until hour three. zyrtec®. love the air. claritin® doesn't start working until hour three. i have obligations. cute tobligations, but obligations.g. i need to rethink the core of my portfolio. what i really need is sleep. introducing the ishares core, building blocks for the heart of your portfolio. find out why 9 out of 10 large professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. ishares by blackrock. call 1-800-ishares for a prospectus which includes investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. read and consider it carefully before investing. risk includes possible loss of principal.

francis, you were going to make a point. >> the point is i think it's important to look ahead at what we can can get done. i thought in your lead-in you identified it. the president not only needs to lead but he needs to demand action, get action, using his executive authority through epa. there's a pathway to get through climate reductions which will in the end affect people on the ground. we need to get that done. >> hold your thought on epa. the first test i feel like of the rhetoric reality is the keystone decision which was punted until after the election. keystone, political political mobilization about this issue. a year and a half ago was obscure, and then activists mobilized around it, made it very difficult to just go make this a kind of behind-the-scenes

deal that the state department signed off on. they have to sign off on it because it crosses international boundaries which means the president has the authority to block it or give it the okay. nebraska republican governor, who is giving some bipartisan cover to opposition to it has now approved a new proposed route for it that he says preserves the aquafer in the state of nebraska. can we take seriously the president's commitment if he allows keystone to go forward? >> chris, it's important to differentiate between approving keystone and whether the oil sands will be developed. here's the problem -- >> the oil sand -- let me explain, it's very thick and dirty energy in alberta, production emissions from canada oil sands 134% higher emissions from crude oil -- >> that's in production. well to wheels it's about 5% to 15%. >> right.

once you -- >> here's the key to understand, the price of oil is $95 a barrel today. the production cost of oil sands is less than $50. here's the truth, a sad truth but the truth, these are going to be developed. now, we've got to figure out a bigger way to get in front of climate. keystone is not the sinqunon of climate protection. it's not. oil sands are going to be developed. i'm not urging the president to approve the pipeline. what i'm saying is we need bigger solutions than one pipeline. that's not going to get it done. >> i disagree with paul. i think keystone is very important. it's a very important symbol the president can make. is it in the national interest or not to bring down dirty tar sands oil from canada so that it can be exported to another country, which is the intent? it is not in the national interest. the whole point of the president's comment at inaugural is we need to get on a new path in our energy future. we need one that's cleaner. he said it may be hard but we

have to do it. so, it may be hard for him to turn down the keystone pipeline. he should turn it down. we should get on a clean energy pathway. >> to me the answer is undoubtedly, unequivocally, if he supports it, he's not authentic on climate. i love the president. i voted for the president. but keystone is wrong. it's putting tar in the ground. the people that are impacted are people of color, native americans, you know, i completely disagree. i just -- >> so you don't agree with the economics of tar sands that when there's a $50 a barrel profit to be made, they're not going to be developed? >> here's what i think, i think -- i want to say this quickly. the people that pay the cost, i hope the president says, the people that end up paying the cost of that, will see the consequences of storm in the rockaways, near the tar, that it's not okay -- >> i just think keystone, there are much bigger, more important issues in climate change than keystone. >> i want to make a meta points

from arguments of inevitability, which you see in climate discussions which is, this is going to happen because there's overwhelming economic logic behind it. i don't think that's a ridiculous argument. everyone said, key stone was going to be approved. that was a done deal. but it wasn't because activists spoke up. then you say, if keystone's blocked they'll find a way to get it out of the country because of economic incentives. a lot of activists will go crazy about building a port on the pacific coast -- >> i'm not advocating one way or the other. what i'm saying is that we need bigger solutions. we need to price carbon so th that -- so that the economics of the oil sands don't work. that's the bigger solution. >> that i agree with. the problem is, pricing carbon is going to require congress, and congress -- >> by the way, we're talking about canada now. >> right. >> the resources in canada, i think, we need to bring a lot more pressure on the canadians for what they were doing. we should talk about the

international aspect here. u.s. emissions are only 16% of the global total. >> paul, let's say denying keystone puts pressure on canada. canada can't build a pipeline to get it out of their own country. they can't get east or west. they want to go south. why should we be the vehicle to develop one of the dirtiest sources on the planet. >> i'm just telling you there are bigger solutions. >> of course there are bigger solutions. i will tell you about keystone, it has lit a fire across america in a way you cannot imagine. there will be tens of thousands of people in washington on president's weekend demonstrating on keystone. they are demanding action. they don't want the keystone pipeline. they want action. >> they should demand the price of carbon -- >> key stone is a symbol of -- >> ta-nehisi, you thought a lot about the president and the way we put a lot on him and these calculations of his pragmatism. how do you interpret this decision? >> i think symbols are important.

i think lines in the sand are important. again, speaking again as somebody in the base, i think making a stand is actually important. one of the things about this discussion is, you know, you talk about economic imperatives. i think the idea that will be no cause for taking on big issue. there will be a cost. we should say that. we should be very up front -- >> political cost, economic costs -- >> it will hurt, it will hurt. >> henry waxman, of course, co-authored the bill that made it through the house which was somewhat miraculous it made it through the house, he's taking's paul's line on keystone and i think he's trying to prepare the base that it's going to get approved. should i say president, if you don't agree with me, i'm not going to work with you on solving climate change issue? that would be childish and counterproductive. you mentioned something other than keystone and the epa. i want to talk about that after. a break. [ male announcer ] when you wear dentures you may not know

that your mouth is under attack, from food particles and bacteria. try fixodent. it helps create a food seal defense for a clean mouth and kills bacteria for fresh breath. ♪ fixodent, and forget it. how did i know? well, i didn't really. see, i figured low testosterone would decrease my sex drive... but when i started losing energy and became moody... that's when i had an honest conversation with my doctor. we discussed all the symptoms... then he gave me some blood tests. showed it was low t. that's it. it was a number -- not just me.

[ male announcer ] today, men with low t have androgel 1.62% (testosterone gel). the #1 prescribed topical testosterone replacement therapy, increases testosterone when used daily. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or signs in a woman, which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are or may become pregnant or are breastfeeding, should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. so...what do men do when a number's too low? turn it up! [ male announcer ] in a clinical study, over 80%

of treated men had their t levels restored to normal. talk to your doctor about all your symptoms. get the blood tests. change your number. turn it up. androgel 1.62%. using robotics and mobile technology, verizon innovators have made it possible for teachers to teach, and for a kid... nathan. tadpole. ... to feel like a kid again. because the world's biggest challenges deserve even bigger solutions. powerful answers. verizon.

so, one of the, i think, amazing hidden stories about climate is this court decision that basically found the epa can regulate carbon under the clean air act. it's not a crazy idea. carbon is a pollution, right? it has negative externalties, and they are precisely the thing that the clean air act was designed to allow us to regulate. >> it's an endangerment finding. >> right. it endangers public health. it certainly does. we see it all the time now. the question is, is the epa going to exercise that power? and that's a really fraught question. what is your sense about -- >> our sense is epa will do it. that was clearly the indication from the president's comments at inaugural. i think we'll see more in the state of the union. i certainly hope we do because that is the pathway. there's no other pathway right now to reduce emissions. ultimately we need legislation. we're not going to get it in this congress, in my view.

let's get started in an area where the supreme court is the supreme court that gave them the authority to do it. so, you know, there is a great pathway for that reduction. we got to get going. >> walk me through what this looks like, if we can get into the weeds a little built. there are rules that are due in april for new power plants, right? >> two different rules. last year the administration came out with rules on new power plants, which would basically regulate carbon emissions, keep them very low, make it impossible, in effect, to make a new coal-fired power plant. but that only deals with new power plants. you know, that's good but that doesn't deal with the source of the pollution -- >> which it out there right now. >> emissions in the u.s. come from dirty power plants. we have to regulate those dirty power plants. clean act authority under section 111-d regulates power of from the existing power plants. have you to model that. that has to be created in a way that's going to work. one thing about our energy

fabric is, it's different in every state. some states have a lot of coal, some have hydro, some have gas. they've come up with a proposal that would allow flexibility among states. each state would design -- there would be a standard they couldn't go above, you know, a level of emissions. each state would have to design their pathway. it could be through greater efficiency, which is the most cost effective. it could be through more renewables. it could be -- >> however they get there, though, they hit the target. >> one of the most interesting things about this is the president isn't -- this isn't a choice of the president. he's required under law. because epa found that these pollutants are an endangerment to public health, he is required under law to regulate them. he has no choice in the matter. he has to regulate them. >> do you see that happening, and, b -- i hear that but the think, the political blowback is -- i can only imagine what will happen on capitol hill and

fox news if this happened. >> one thing that would be important is to look at who the next administrator will be. i think that will be the greatest indicator. >> of the epa. >> of the epa. lisa jackson has been a fierce warrior, she's put herself out there and taken a significant hit back. it will be important to see who the white house selects, what type of power and support they'll put behind that person. because i think the reality is, the hit from fox news and others, the litigation, cannot be not taken really seriously. >> it can't be -- the key point here is, it can't be defended by the administrator alone, right? >> right, right. >> if you're going to do it, the president and the white house has to stand and say -- >> one of the greatest challenges is it's been this incredibly vibrant epa. it's really been a fight between epa and everyone else. so, the success of what happens in the future will be, is it a fight with the white house's epa or a fight with the epa? >> chris, on this point i think

it's very important that this cannot be an issue that's solely inside the beltway. >> right. that's why we're here. >> exactly. i appreciate that. there has to be support, wide support across the country. you know, it's our responsibility, the environmental community, others with an interest to really work on getting that support because you're going up against the toughest industry out there, fossil fuel industry, and it's a toe to toe fight, no question about it. >> the message is simple. we have a clean air act to protect us from pollution. c carbon is pollution -- >> there's an irony here. not only is the president regulated under law but congress had a cheaper solution right on their door step. everybody agrees that the command and control system is going to be more expensive. >> right, right. >> it was congress's choice -- >> but they ran away from it. >> -- to make it more expensive and less effective. >> i want to thank phaedra

ellis-lamkins, francis is the game junior seau loved responsible for his death. a new belt. some nylons. and what girl wouldn't need new shoes? and with all the points i've been earning, i was able to get us a flight to our favorite climbing spot even on a holiday weekend. ♪ things are definitely looking up. [ male announcer ] with no blackout dates, you can use your citi thankyou points to travel whenever you want. visit citi.com/thankyoucards to apply. here at the hutchison household. but one dark stormy evening... she needed a good meal and a good family. so we gave her purina cat chow complete. it's the best because it has something for all of our cats! and after a couple of weeks she was part of the family. we're so lucky that lucy picked us. [ female announcer ] purina cat chow complete. and for a delicious way to help maintain a healthy weight,

try new purina cat chow healthy weight.

with multiple lacerations to the wing and a fractured beak. surgery was successful, but he will be in a cast until it is fully healed, possibly several months. so, if the duck isn't able to work, how will he pay for his living expenses? aflac. like his rent and car payments? aflac. what about gas and groceries? aflac. cell phone? aflac, but i doubt he'll be using his phone for quite a while cause like i said, he has a fractured beak.

[ male announcer ] send the aflac duck a get-well card at getwellduck.com. linebacker junior seau committed suicide shooting himself in the chest, leaving his brain intact. it tested positive for chronic encephalopathy, which symptoms may include aggression, depression, caused by repeated hits to the head. his family sued the nfl, saying it concealed the dangers of repetitive blows to the head, and put the nfl's money before the health of its players. in the suit the seau family aalleges the nfl new or suspected any rule changes that sought to recognize that link and the health risk to nfl players would impose an economic

cost that would significantly and adversely change the profit margins enjoyed by the nfl and its teams. and the family is also suing the helmet maker saying it was responsible for the design. nfl responded our attorneys will review it and respond appropriately through the court. seau was one of three retired players who committed suicide and then tested positive for cte, which to date has only been detectable postmortem. he asked his family to donate his brain so doctors could study the long-term effects of getting hit in the head. the easterling family are also suing the nfl, and the suits mirror those against the nfl brought by close to 4,000 former players. all of this is increasingly dire legal and publicity threat to the nfl, a league that protects its image. the league has responded with rule changes meant to protect

players from brain trauma. the deeper question one week before 100 million fans tune into the super bowl, is the sport just too dangerous to play? joining us are mary ann easterling, the widow of ray easterling, and kevin turner, former nfl fullback who played for the patriots and philadelphia eagles. he was diagnosed with als, or lou gehrig's disease. mary ann, sorry about the loss of your husband. >> thank you. >> what were the last years of his life like? what were the effects of having this condition? >> when i first met gray, he was gregareous, he loved jesus, he

loved youth. once he retired from football, he gradually became less and less able to deal with his injuries, but particularly starting in 1989 he began to experience insomnia and depression. his personality changed to the point where i had to pinch myself sometimes, i didn't recognize the person whom i married. he had difficulty dealing with authorities. he was argumentative a lot. increasingly starting in about 2008 he started to be late for all of his business appointments. he did not handle money well. we became less and less

financially viable. honestly, the thing that tripped it off is he began to not be able to use his hands. he couldn't button the buttons on his shirt. he couldn't tie his shoes. or write. so, we sought the help of a neuropsychiatrist in richmond, who diagnosed dementia due to the concussions he had suffered in the nfl. >> kevin, i want to turn to you and ask, when you were diagnosed with als, was your first thought about your playing career? >> to be honest with you, no. i wasn't very sure what als was. i'd heard of it, but wasn't certain as to the details of the condition.

>> when you think back about your playing career, when you were playing, were you cognizant of the risks, is that something people talked about, or was it part of the game, essentially? >> well, i knew -- i was very keenly aware of the risks to e the -- you know, my knees, my neck and back, shoulders and things like that. all those things, i certainly knew the risk and was willing to accept it. what i went through of 12 years or 13 years since my retirement was something totally different than i expected. just with the changes that went

on. you know, looking back, i can see a lot of the things, but at the time, you know, nothing stood out. but i had a lot of the same things that mary described in ray. a problem organizing, planning, all those sorts of things. i wound up in '09 getting -- filing for divorce and rups in the same month. >> i want to let viewers know, the study so far from the institute of occupational health, causes are three times higher than the general population. death from alzheimer's and als for retired players is four

times higher than the general population. mary ann and kevin, stick with us and we'll bring to the table a neurologist that works with the new york giants, a football fan who has turned away from the game because of the more that we learn about its impact right after this. ts that can help lowr cholesterol? and it tastes good? sure does! wow. it's the honey, it makes it taste so... well, would you look at the time... what's the rush? be happy. be healthy. >> announcer: meet jill. she thought she'd feel better after seeing her doctor. and she might have, if not for kari, the identity thief who stole jill's social security number to open credit cards, destroying jill's credit and her dream of retirement. now meet amanda. with a swipe of her debit card, she bought some gas... and an all-expense-paid trip to hawaii for ben. ben is the identity thief who used a device called

a skimmer to steal her information from her card to open a fraudulent account. every year millions of americans just like you learn that a little personal information in the wrong hands could wreak havoc on your life. this is identity theft, and no one helps stop it better than lifelock. lifelock offers the most comprehensive identity theft protection available. ordinary credit monitoring services tell you after your identity has been stolen; they may take 30 days to alert you! too late for amanda. with lifelock's 24/7 proactive protection, jill would have been alerted as soon as they noticed an attack in their network, before it was too late. and lifelock's bank account takeover alerts would have notified amanda in time to help protect her money. lifelock guards your social security number, your money, your credit, even the equity in your home. while identity theft can't be completely stopped, no one protects you better than lifelock. and lifelock stands behind that, with the power of their

$1 million service guarantee. you have so much to protect, and nothing to lose when you call lifelock right now and try 60 days of identity theft protection risk-free. 60 days risk-free! use promo code: onguard. order now, and get this document shredder, a $29 value, free! call or go online now. [♪...] in america today we're running out of a vital resource we need to compete on the global stage. what we need are people prepared for the careers of our new economy. by 2025 we could have 20 million jobs without enough college graduates to fill them. that's why at devry university, we're teaming up with companies like cisco to help make sure everyone is ready with the know-how we need for a new tomorrow. [ male announcer ] make sure america's ready. make sure you're ready. at devry.edu/knowhow.

♪ joining me at the table now, i have mike peca, sports reporter for npr, tina, team doctor for the new york giants, and ta-nehisi back at the table as well. tina, what do we know now about the ricks of a career playing football and getting -- sustaining repeated head trauma? >> we know that football is a sport which lends itself to trauma, unfortunately, so we

know we have to proceed with a lot of caution with these players who are so vulnerable to the effects of trauma. we know head trauma can cause concussion and we know concussion is a alteration in mental status which ka cause neurological symptoms and psychiatric symptoms as well. >> one of the things that i think is hard for us to track is when did we start to know this? how -- what is the time frame in which the risks have become clear and established by the literature, and where is the literature headed in terms of just what level of injury is acceptable risk? >> one is the short-term effects of concussion, which is concerning and the other is becoming increasingly present in today's world is the long-term effects of concussion and the long-term effects of cumulative brain injuries so one concussion after another. and the research and literature is both taking direction of

trying to find out which factors around concussion are causing long-term problems. >> is it just concussions? i've seen some literature to suggest that subconcussive small impacts over a period of time might also produce some of these symptoms long term. >> that is definitely possible. i would say if concussions are managed correctly, we believe that we can safeguard the brains of these players. >> mike, this is the big question right now which is, a, how the league has responded, and, b, two tiers of question is can this risk be managed in some way that's acceptable or is the game just unacceptably dangerous? are we dealing with something that 100 years from now will be viewed as a barbaric relic because it cannot be played in any way that approaches the level of safety that we would want in a workplace? >> yeah. of the two tiers of risk, have you to separate one of those when we talk about what's acceptable risk, who's taking

the risk? with nfl players making millions or hundreds of thousands of dollars, that's one thing. with high school students, that's entirely another. pop warner, 11-year-olds, that's a third category ail together. 1.2 million boys who play high school football. it's the most popular participation sport in high school. americans love football. 50 million people almost watched both of those championship games last weekend. so, it seems weird that we're talking about the possible death of a sport that's not only the most popular sport in america, it's actually the most popular pastime, most popular media entertainme entertainment. how can they both be true? look at boxing. >> i want to play the terry bradshaw sound, one of the most famous football players ever to play, and this is what he would say to his son today about playing football. >> if i had a son today, i would say this to all our audience and viewers out there, i wouldn't

let him play football. >> you wouldn't? >> there will be a time in the next decade where we won't see football as it is, i believe. in state of texas it's king. but i believe soccer will elevate itself, basketball and baseball, and contact sports will slowly fade away. i would not want my child out there and i would not -- the fear of them getting these head injuries, and they're out there, is just too great for me. too much fun to be had in athletics. football is an awesome sport but also a violent sport. we know what we checked in for. 7 years of age that's what i wanted to do in my life and i didn't care that i got hurt. then the question, would you do it again? absolutely. >> ta-nehisi? >> i want to redirect the conversation a little back to this question about subconcussive blows, which is ultimately why i gave it up. love football. football is my oldest friend. i started watching football when i was 5 years old. quet for me, you take a guy like

junior seau who when he first died, was there a history of concussion? there was no history of concussion. but what we knew at the time was there no history. chris henry, a wide receiver, not a middle linebacker, not a guy known to have taking a lot of blows to the head, when he died, and they did the analysis, turned out he had cte. i'm skeptical even of this notion that it can actually be managed. managed how? there's an incentive as a football player not to allow you to see i'm injured, all due respects, doctors in command, head coaches, to get players back on the field -- >> this is a tremendous problem we face today and one we're very cognizant of. doctors who see football players are very aware of the incentives and we're very careful to screen people for that. and to not let that bias your decision in any possible way. >> the doctors -- one of the things in the history,

ta-nehisi, you put up a history of the nfl's responses. what you see is time and time again, essentially doctors are put out there officially who are team doctors by the nfl saying, well, we don't really know and it doesn't look that bad and we can figure it out. >> that's exactly why it's important to are an independent consultant, actually, which is the role i play for the giants. which you have an unbiased opinion and what you're trying to safeguard is the brain of that player and their long-term health, both neurological and psychological in addition to their medical well-being? >> how can it be independent? the problem with football is everyone has -- the coaches, the players, everyone has a vested interest in you getting back out on the field. as long as the league is pay for it, someone within the league saying, how do you get it independent? >> answer that question after a quick break. ♪ [ snoring ] [ male announcer ] zzzquil™ sleep-aid. [ snoring ]

[ snoring ] [ male announcer ] it's not for colds. it's not for pain. it's just for sleep. [ snoring ] [ male announcer ] because sleep is a beautiful thing™. [ birds chirping ] zzzquil™. the non-habit forming sleep-aid from the makers of nyquil®. ♪

i'm up next, but now i'm singing the heartburn blues. hold on, prilosec isn't for fast relief. cue up alka-seltzer. it stops heartburn fast. ♪ oh what a relief it is! i don't have to leave my desk and get up and go to the post office anymore. [ male announcer ] with stamps.com you can print real u.s. postage for all your letters and packages. i have exactly the amount of postage i need, the instant i need it. can you print only stamps? no... first class. priority mail. certified. international. and the mail man picks it up. i don't leave the shop anymore. [ male announcer ] get a 4 week trial plus $100 in extras including postage and a digital scale. go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again.

tena, you were going to

answer if you could truly be independent. the system set up here, there's a lot of money at stake and that's derived from players playing. the question is, can anyone who's in that ecosystem ever be independent and make the call to actually do things that might not be in the financial interest in the chinese short term? >> we absolutely strive to make it independent -- >> kevin, please, go ahead. >> i'm sorry. >> no, go ahead. >> what frustrates me is we knew -- i'll say we in general, but doctors have discovered this in boxers years and years ago.

even when it was brought up in football, i don't think the nfl really took anybody serious. you know, probably until '09 or 2010. it was like word finally got to the powers that be that, hey, the canaries are dying, so maybe you out to change the way we're doing this. so that -- you know, i sat and listened to -- back in '07, when i was thinking that maybe the hits to the head had an effect on me and sit there and i

remember seeing us show hbo where the nfl's head, neck and spine doctor was just almost rude in the fact that he was just saying it's got nothing to do with it, you know. >> to get to this point of independence, part of it is getting to this culture. >> that's radically changed. even since the time junior seau was playing, doctors are cognizant to the risks of athletes and football players from football and other sports in which they're vulnerable to concussion. >> what has changed in the league? >> it's not always the doctors who have their say. we saw this not with a head injury but with a leg injury with robert griffin, the greatest orthopedist in the world was ignored. >> explained what happened to robert griffin. >> dr. james andrews, the most respected orthopedic surgeon in the world, was not even allowed to properly examine him, never cleared him and he went back to

play. >> quarterback for the redskins who was basically limping around the field on national television and went on twitter say, please for the love of god, pull this guy from the game. >> by the way, the coach said he was cleared -- >> right. what the coach did gets into culture. not the culture of doctors and executive, but the cultures of the players -- >> internal to the -- >> -- and the coaches who are putting themselves on the line. i was in the ravens/patriots game and ravens were saying of pollard who put a hit on ridley, one of the biggest plays of the game. pollard's teammates say he plays for free. what does that mean? we think he'll be fined and give up his game check. ridley was concussion 239 this year in the nfl of acknowledged concussions. but there was no fine on that hit. steven ridley does not say that was a not clean hit.

pollard says, this is the world we live in and players will lie to get on the field and do these plays on the field. >> so, the question is, how to change the culture of the sport and the business of the sport. i have low testosterone. there, i said it. how did i know? well, i didn't really. see, i figured low testosterone would decrease my sex drive... but when i started losing energy and became moody... that's when i had an honest conversation with my doctor. we discussed all the symptoms... then he gave me some blood tests. showed it was low t. that's it. it was a number -- not just me. [ male announcer ] today, men with low t have androgel 1.62% (testosterone gel). the #1 prescribed topical testosterone replacement therapy, increases testosterone when used daily. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or signs in a woman, which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer,

and women who are or may become pregnant or are breastfeeding, should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. so...what do men do when a number's too low? turn it up! [ male announcer ] in a clinical study, over 80% of treated men had their t levels restored to normal. talk to your doctor about all your symptoms. get the blood tests. change your number. turn it up. androgel 1.62%. get the blood tests. change your number. turn it up. excuse me, sir i'm gonna have to ask you to power down your little word game. i think your friends will understand. oh no, it's actually my geico app...see? ...i just uh paid my bill. did you really? from the plane? yeah, i can manage my policy, get roadside assistance, pretty much access geico 24/7. sounds a little too good to be true sir.

i'll believe that when pigs fly. ok, did she seriously just say that? geico. just click away with our free mobile app. we've decided to we're all having such a great year in the gulf, put aside our rivalry. 'cause all our states are great. and now is when the gulf gets even better. the beaches and waters couldn't be more beautiful. take a boat ride or just lay in the sun. enjoy the wildlife and natural beauty. and don't forget our amazing seafood. so come to the gulf, you'll have a great time. especially in alabama. you mean mississippi. that's florida. say louisiana or there's no dessert. brought to you by bp and all of us who call the gulf home. this reduced sodium soup says it may help lower cholesterol, how does it work?

you just have to eat it as part of your heart healthy diet. step 1. eat the soup. all those veggies and beans, that's what may help lower your cholesterol and -- well that's easy [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. from new york, i'm chris hayes with mike pesca, neurologist dr. teena, ta-nehisi, mrs. easterling, and kevin turner. mary ann, in the later years of your husband's life, what are his feelings about his football career were? one of the arguments that gets made is, look, these are grown adults who are taking on risks and making money and they know what they're getting into. i wondered at the end of his life, as he looked back on his

career, how he felt about the bargain he struck with the game of football. >> ray felt used. he felt like the current culture in the billions that the nfl was making was built on the players in the '60s and '70s. he would not have done it again if he had a choice. and i would say i believe our culture will be judged by the way we treat the infirmed and these guys who are dealing with dementia and als and alzheimer's due to the concussions. and i believe the nfl will be judged. the nfl pa will be judged by how they help them. and that's what our lawsuit is about. >> do you think fans should be part of that judgment? ultimately it seems to me one of the questions here for people

that don't play in the league or are employed by the league, is just the millions of people that watch football, and i'm one of them. i mean, i love watching football. >> absolutely, i agree. but what's not realized is that those players back then didn't make the millions. they suffered the consequence of losing whatever little they did make. it's not a question they knew they would have these problems with their brains. just like kevin said, they knew they were risking their physical bodies, but their brains were -- didn't come into play in that equation. >> mike, do you -- kevin, yes, please. >> chris, it's hard for that culture to change. like i said earlier, when the players especially have to be

somewhat responsible and police themselves, it's hard to do that sometimes when you want to get all the reps or you don't want to miss part of the game or come out because of -- because you're a little dizzy or hearing bells ringing in your head. you just kind of keep going. but i know one of the reasons we set up the kevin turner foundation was to, you know, make people more aware. and i don't believe that culture will be changed until, you know, say, the 5 and 6-year-olds of today, you know, from about 20 years from now, because cultures are still -- you know, it's the tough guy thing. and i had it. and everybody that plays the nfl

has it. you want to play. you want to keep going. >> it's a warrior sport. it's a warrior mentality. nothing gets you more respect than playing hurt. >> toughness and violence are interwoven into the dna of the game. this is aan mazing report on pop warner game in "new york times" that left five preteens with concussions. emergency medical technician on the sideline evaluated of the boys worried they might have concussions had them take the pads off, game went on without officials intervening. braves with three players already knocked out in the game no longer had the required number of players to participate. even with what are known as mercy rules, regulations designed to limit a dominant team's ability to run up scores, the touchdowns kept coming and so did the concussions. when the game ended the final score is 50-0 and five preadolescent boys had head injuries, the last hurt on the final play of the game. >> that's a horrific anecdote and it needs to stop. if you don't think that change can be made, look at the issue of not giving players water. it used to be seen as tough.

after highly publicized deaths, every middle school and high school coach has plenty of water breaks. those involved in youth sports are doing it for the right reasons and there can be change. but the whole issue, is it even possible to do all the things correctly and make this a safe sport is still an open question. >> yeah. and that's that's -- i'm sorry. >> please, kevin. >> i certainly think they can -- you know, that football will continue. like i say, as america's favorite sport and, of course, mine. but, you know, i don't let my boys play football until they're in high school. my oldest is already in high school. my youngest, he won't play as much as my oldest did because now i'm a little smarter. so -- and i believe a lot of people will go that way. one thing i like to mention, you know how in little league baseball we keep a pitch count,

so pitchers at 12 and 13 won't throw out their elbow. a friend of mine, chris, you know, talks about, you know, why don't we keep a hit count? with today's technology, that seems like something, you know, worthy of us doing as a part of the sport to urge that -- >> that's very much, kevin, the physician's role, team physician's role to keep a hit count. one of the important things to remember is that each person's brain is obviously different. so each person's brain has a distinct reaction to a concussion, which may be less or more severe than another player's, therefore, we have to exercise the same amount of caution amongst everyone. when we see a player, we take into account how many concussions they've had in the past, how many were involved with loss of concussion, how

severe the concussions were, how long it took them to recover from the previous concussions, along with many other factors. >> hold on one second -- >> hopefully now players are more aware of what a concussion is. i know when i, you know, retired and was visiting doctors, they were saying how many concussions do you have? i'd say, well, only three or four. but the doctor would give me the criteria. i'd say, oh, that happened, i don't know, 50 times. can't count. but it just never was talked about. >> right. mary ann, something you want to say. >> yeah. for those parents out there, i think the most important thing you can do is be aware during the game, watch how the coach coaches, make sure there's a trainer or a physician or physical therapist available who

can -- who can judge. but as a parent, you have to get educated on what affects your child. and you have to know when their personality changes, when they're sleeping or they can't deal with things due to hits they may have taken. >> ta-nehisi, the look in your eyes is sort of horrified. >> i'm sorry. >> no, no, it's good. one of the things here is we're talking about how to manage risks. as you talk about them, they become more and more macabe, grotesque -- >> how about not play? how about not play and watch. this is not like a big moral thing for me. you can look at my clothes, look at the products i have and see that they were designed in sweat shops. i'm not try to put myself up as morally clean but this notion that football is so essential to our lives, that we must find some way to negotiate the injury of your brain is horrific to me.

i just have to say that. >> what was it that made you -- because you say when you stopped watching, it wasn't that you stopped watching because -- it was more visceral. you couldn't enjoy the game anymore as opposed -- >> no, it wasn't like going vegetarian or something like that, like i'm not going to eat meat. it literally became -- look, football's a beautiful sport. all sorts of things that happen outside of big hits, you know, it's -- it's strategy. all these great things you watch. bottom line, though, this is about violence. it's about controlled violence. that was part of why i enjoyed it. i loved steve pat, i remember him knocking christian back. >> cathartic. >> it was cathartic. when i could no longer watch tom brady under threat of violence, whether he got hit or not, when i could no longer take enjoyment from that? why was i trying to manage that?

>> this gets to the final point. there's this amazing disjuncture that the league is more and more successful in terms of the dollars it produces, amount of people that watch it, tv deals they strike, the amount of people that play it and this growing threat to that success in the growing body of knowledge about what it has done to players who have done, what it's doing to players now, the laults mounting and the publicity and the question is, when do those two lines intersect? >> i think the way the league sees it, maybe they'll lose these concussion lawsuits and pay out $1 billion, $2 billion, and keep going. change, reform the best they can, institute the programs the best they k but at the basis, the violence and brutality of the game is what makes it popular. not just that we thrill but it makes it impossible to play more than once a week. because it's a rare entertainment, unlike other sports, it has that build to the weekend. it kind of satisfies a lot of our evolutionary or animal urges. i mean, it just speaks to where america is.

until people feel like ta-nehisi, they're not giving up something by football, but they're repulsed by football, they won't turn away from it. >> i do believe the culture is changing somewhat, slowly but surely. we've seen stricter concussion protocols, coaches and trainers change tremendously, we've seen lots of research being done, the nfl has given a lot of financial help to research being done in this area or they're offering it, and helmets are changing, a lot of research being done on helmets, people are being taken off the fields much sooner, which is when they should be, players should be immediately removed from the field when there's any suspicion of concussion. that i have definitely seen. it's still not perfect but it's changing. >> mary ann and kevin, i want to get your final thoughts on all this right after we take a quick break. burns for you... ♪ i'm up next, but now i'm singing the heartburn blues. hold on, prilosec isn't for fast relief. cue up alka-seltzer. it stops heartburn fast.

♪ oh what a relief it is! [ bop ] [ bop ] [ bop ] you can do that all you want, i don't like v8 juice. [ male announcer ] how about v8 v-fusion. a full serving of vegetables, a full serving of fruit. but what you taste is the fruit. so even you... could've had a v8.

kevin turner, my final question for you is whether you think fans should be turning away from the sport until more is done to address this squags. >> well, i think as long as we live in a monetary system, there's going to be football. there's too much money bet on it. owners are making too much money, players are making money. so much money and it's going to be here. i just hope and pray that the coaches and trainers and players all start to get it of how serious, you know, head trauma and brain injury can be.

you know, just because you're not limping doesn't mean you're okay. >> mary ann, what would -- you said your husband felt used at the end of his life. what would justice for you look like? >> well, chris, because i have friends who are going through what i went through the last 20 years, justice would be that the nfl would take care of its players. just to provide the testing. the baseline mris need to be done for current players and for the retired players. a way to help them through the crisis that they're experiencing with dementia, als and alzheimer's. >> mary ann easterling, widow of ray easterling, kevin turner, you'll be doing a fund-raiser on super bowl weekend with mike

ditka benefiting als research. thank you for sharing your stories this morning. really appreciate it. >> you're welcome. >> it was a pleasure. >> here at the table, mike pesca from npr and the podcast hang up and listen which was like the "up" of sports podcasts, and drchltd s dr. shetty. thank you for joining us.

this week the white house announced a national day of sifg hacking, billed as an opportunity for software developers, technologistings and entrepreneurs to unleash their can-do american spirit to create innovative solutions for problems that matter. they are still mourning aaron swartz who earlier died of suicide at age 26. he was a remarkable figure. in addition to being a hacker, activist, a writer, programmer and he possessed the extraordinarily rare and powerful combination of

technical skill and political acumen. 14 he created ras, tool used to subscribe online. at 16 he created common license. at 19 he co-founded a company. and he founded demand progress, that led the fight against censorship bill. at the time of his death he was under federal indictment for downloading stories to which he had access. he was facing 13 felony charges carrying potential penalties of up to 35 years in prison and $1 million in fines. in the wake of his death, u.s. attorney for district of massachusetts ortiz, whose office prosecuted aaron, has come under fierce attack. last week she responded saying i must however make clear this office's conduct was appropriate in bringing and handling this case. in the discussions with his counsel about a resolution of the case, the office sought an appropriate sentence that

matched the alleged conduct. at no time did this office ever seek or ever tell mr. swartz's attorneys it intended to seek maximum penalties under the law. many of aaron's peers feel he was not the target of federal government for downloading too many articles, some of which were free, he was a target because the state wanted to make an example of someone who powerful questioned authority. here's aaron explaining his activism in 2010. >> i feel, you know, very strongly that it's not enough to just live in the world as it is, to just kind of take what you're given and, you know, follow the things that adults told you to do and that, you know, your parents told you to do and that society tells you to do. i think you should always be questioning. i take this very scientific attitude that everything you've learned is provisional. it's always open to recantation or questioning. and i think the same applies to society. i felt growing up, you know, i slowly had this process of realizing that all the things around me that people had told me were just the natural way

things were, the thing way things always would be, they weren't natural at all and they could be changed and more importantly, could be changed. >> aaron presents a unique threat to the government for being to do what most activists can't do. joining me is taren stinebrickner-kauffman, aaron's partner. thank you for coming here today. again, i'm totally torn up about aaron. when i heard the news about aaron, i knew he had a history of battling depression. he had written about it on his blog. i didn't know it from his personally. i think i didn't know how much the looming court case played in all this. and i guess my first question is, what your sense of what the court case meant to him, how much it loomed in his imagination. >> you know, i was aaron for more than a year and a half. depression was not a major part of his life during that time.

what was a major part was this case. and it loomed over our entire relationship. i started dating him a few weeks before the indictment was made public. he was up against the full force of the u.s. government for -- that was charging him for 13 felonies that he didn't believe he had committed. and, you know, the whole time he was angry, he was frustrated, he was under enormous stress. but i think in the end he was just extremely weary. i think he just couldn't wake up and face another day of trying to, you know, wrangle money to pay his lawyers, trying to figure out how to get m.i.t. to stand up for him, which they could have done, figure out how to convince steve hyman and ortiz that he wasn't a security threat, just a guy that downloaded academic journal articles. >> how did he -- how did you and

he understand why this prosecution was being brought with such force and vigor? >> you know, i don't think we know. and one of the things that i and his family are calling for right now is an investigation by congress into exactly that question. i mean, i think it's clear that they wanted to make an example of him. he was arrested initially during the bradley -- the height of the bradley manning sxajdz his indictment was announced on the same day as the arrest of 16 anonymous hackers. he doesn't fall into those categories but the government is having a hard time catching hackers, finding people that steal credit card numbers, but they caught aaron and they wanted to -- they wanted to s w show -- they wanted to make an example of him. >> why did he download these articles? what was the idea? >> you know, the truth is, we don't know. the government alleges he was planning to release the

documents publicly, which -- and i would point out that, you know, i don't -- we don't have the data set of which documents were downloaded but many of them are in the public domain, not just in the sense -- all of them are in the public domain with the sense that they're available to anybody on j. store on -- >> these are not -- this is -- you know, the journal of anthropology and -- >> yeah. >> this is just broadly the academic literature that exists out there on one database. >> yeah. and i think, you know, a lot of academics and librarians -- academics are forced to cede their copyrights to the journal when they publish them, and i think most would want their articles published. to answer your question, we don't know. he may have made that case at trial, but he wasn't -- you know, he was -- he may have revealed at trial what his intentions were but we don't know. >> are you -- how do you

understand his death? i mean, are you angry? are you -- >> yeah, yeah, i'm angry. i'm angry at the prosecutors, i'm angry at m.i.t. i'm also angry at the broader criminal justice system. like, there are so many people who face the kind of exten shall crisis aaron faced and don't have the resources and support aaron does. aaron would have been the last person who would have wanted us to focus on his own life and his own death. he wanted us -- he would have wanted us to place this in the context of the broader system where we've built a legal system focused on punishment and revenge, not focused on justice. and certainly not focused on mercy. i think this needs to be a wake-up call to our country and to everybody who -- for whom

aaron might have been the first person they knew who faced these kinds of problems. >> yeah. it's a unique thing to be on the other end of the state's power when it comes to criminal prosecution. there's this kind of definitional question about what aaron's alleged to have done, whether that was stealing or not. and i want to talk about that in the context of his life's work, what he actually was fighting and the kind of work he did and bring in other folks after a break. wait for it... [ dog ] you know, i just don't think i should have to wait for it! who do you think i am, quicken loans? ♪ at quicken loans, we won't make you wait for it. our efficient, online system allows us to get you through your home loan process fast. which means you'll never have to beg for a quick closing. one more way quicken loans is engineered to amaze. bonkers, look at me when i'm talking to you. ♪ i don't wanna be right [ record scratch ]

what?! it's not bad for you. it just tastes that way. [ female announcer ] honey nut cheerios cereal -- heart-healthy, whole grain oats. you can't go wrong loving it. i'm up next, but now i'm singing the heartburn blues. hold on, prilosec isn't for fast relief. cue up alka-seltzer. it stops heartburn fast. ♪ oh what a relief it is!

marie callender's gives you a way to make any day a special occasion. new mini cream pies for one. real whip cream and a cookie-crumb crust. marie callender's. it's time to savor. joining us is susan crawford, author of the book "captive odd que "captive o "captive audience" and assistant to president obama for technology and innovation policy, back at the table is ta-nehisi, and i want to bring in lawrence lessig, from edmond j.safra center, and larry is the

founder of creative commons. i want to play this clip of aaron. the issue here, the core issue here, is this tremendous battle that's hang right now. a definitional battle about what property looks like in the 21st century, basically. what access looks like. who can get what information. who controls information. and that was the -- one of the animating causes that aaron was fighting over and committed to. and he's got this great -- when he's talking about the sopa legislation, the stop online piracy act, which he and a lot of activists fought very hard because it would have restricted that information, allowed service providers to cut off access to certain people. this is him talking about the battle being over the metaphor we're using in our heads to think about this information. take a look. >> there's a battle going on right now, a battle to define everything that happens on the internet in terms of traditional things that the law understands.

sharing a video like shoplifting from a movie store? or is it like loaning a videotape to a friend? is reloading a web page over and over again like a peaceful virtual cidin or a shopping of shop windows? is the freedom to connect like freedom of speech or like the freedom to murder? this bill would be a huge, potentially permanent loss, if we lost the ability to communicate with each other over the internet, it would be a change to the bill of rights, the freedoms guaranteed in our constitution, the freedoms our country had been built on would be suddenly deleted. new technology, instead of bringing us greater freedom would have snuffed out fundamental rights we had always taken for granted. and i realize that day, talking to peter, that i couldn't let that happen. >> the irony here is in the statement of the u.s. attorney for district of massachusetts in the press release, regarding aaron's case, that office said stealing is stealing whether you

use a computer command or a crowbar, whether you take documents, data or dollars, it's equally harmful to a victim whether you sell what you have stolen or give it away. to me that's the fundamental question, stealing is stealing. this is the concept of information and bytes are the same as the clothes that you're wearing. >> aaron's death is a terrible tragedy and lead toog a heightened and broadened awareness of the importance of public access to publicly funded research. this isn't a luxury. that everybody should have the ability to improve their lives by getting access to stuff we already paid for. and that it's our property, in a sense, when it's been funded by the federal government. so, pivoting to this idea of making sure that scientifically funded research is available, that we can get access to these riches that are academics' articles. academics just want to be understood. aaron's right. we just want to reach other people, not control it. intermediaries are given them

too much power to be gatekeepers is destructive. >> larry n one of your earlier books you talk about the difference between physical property and intellectual property and an example you give which i've stolen when i talk about the difference between stealing the picnic table out of your neighbor's yard and stealing the idea of putting a picnic table in your yard and the difference consequences of actually having the picnic table and now you both just have picnic tables. the difference between things that are generative or not. this is the guideposts of your work and what was in some ways at stake in much of what aaron was working on. >> yeah, that's right. you know, when you hear a u.s. attorney say something as stupid as stealing with a computer is just the same as stealing with a crowbar, you recognize she knows nothing about computers, nor anything about crowbars. you know, you wonder, where are we in our society that these are the people who are our leaders, right? obviously, nobody, including aaron, wants to create a world

where anybody can go and take whatever there is to take. you know, there's privacy. there's legitimate copyright over, you know, films that have been produced by hollywood studios. but what aaron was making a point about, was the kind of copyrighted material that even the creators wanted to be made accessible around the world. if you remember obama, when he attacked the iraq war as a candidate for senate, he said, i'm not against wars. i'm against dumb wars. that was aaron swartz. he's not against copyright. he was against dumb copyright. that's exactly the kind of example that this protest was trying to demonstrate. >> one of the ironies here is that j. store, which is -- it is a nonprofit, i believe, right? it has this kind of bizarre monopoly over all these academic copyrights. they themselves declined to pursue charges against aaron. and before the massachusetts u.s. attorney issued the

statement, they issued a statement quite soon after his death saying, basically, we kind of wanted to have nothing to do with that. how do you interpret that? >> well, you know -- >> i think that -- >> -- j. store realized this wasn't a case that was going to be good for them either way. right? this wasn't -- the more the people understand how archaic the model we have for disseminating academic research is, the less good it is for the powers that be. you know, i think the real question is why m.i.t. didn't file a suit given all m.i.t.'s cultures and principles should have said, this is a great thing for the world. >> why do we have this stuff behind lock and key? why scant i can't i go -- this silly and naive question. if someone produces a scientific article, why can't i as a citizen read it? >> you needed somebody else to be your microphone and especially as an academic, you

need the brand of a particular journal to reach other people to try to have impact. now that's no longer true. so, i think we're in an awkward period of transition where we're going to be able to publish things without the aid of others in using distribution mechanisms that don't now give that kind of cache to an academic. >> j. store can be an incredible obstacle. >> right. it empowers the entire discussion. one of my big high horses is this idea of journalists as totally, totally ahistorical. maybe if journalists had access to, you know, academic journals and everything, maybe it would still be ahistorical -- >> less of an excuse. >> right, right. but i know when i was starting out, i would be researching a story and my first approach was to find out the history, you know, and i would always run into this wall marked j. store.

it impoverrishes the discussion. as a journalist it's easier than it is for an academic to speak to a broad audience but i'm only able to access certain information. this was brought home after the revolution in egypt. i caught a talk show on tv, and i won't say the name of the show and i'm watching the show, i'm interested in egypt, and it's like, a former adviser for mccain and, you know, some democrat saying -- and i know that somewhere there is some guy in academia who's been studying egypt for 50 years, why didn't they find the article this guy had written, research it and get him on -- >> speaking about egypt, like an arab spring, there's an academic spring going on right now, too, where academics are trying to find ways to get their stuff out there with publisher but in a way anybody can find it in repositories. >> this is stru in economics particularly. larry? >> yes. what's very tragic about this story around j. store is that literally three days before

aaron committed suicide, i received a letter -- i received an e-mail from the president of j. store announcing this new program where they were going to make this material available to anyone who wants to register anywhere in the world. so it was started as a nonprofit with the idea of taking the extraordinary cost, which in 1995 it was, of taking this material and making it accessible to the world. and i think this prosecution has brought them to focus on what their underlying values were. and their underlying values is to make this as broadly accessible as he can. aaron said in his comment, we have this great project going forward. the project of making material openly accessible. that's what public library science does. that's what creative comments is all about. the hard problem is, what do we do looking in the past? in the past this material is locked up and there's no easy legal way to get access to it. >> i want to read from that manifesto.

i can understand the instinct of saying, why -- these people with special knowledge get to decide what gets out there and not. we'll talk about that after this break. we're taking downy to the streets.

which shirt feels more expensive? that one's softer. it's the same t-shirt. really? this one was washed in downy. why spend a lot of money when you can just use downy? downy's putting our money where our soft is. try downy softness. love it or your money back.

you just mentioned aaron's open access manifesto which i wanted to read from. the world's entire scientific and cultural heritage is increasingly being digitized and locked up. those with access to these resources you have been given a privilege. you get to feed of the banquet of knowledge while the rest of the world is locked out, but you cannot keep this privilege for yourselves. you have a duty to share it with the world. sharing is a moral imperative. it's time to come into the light. we need to take information wherever it is stored, make our copies, share them with the world. we need to find for guerilla open access. aaron downloaded a bunch of

documents, which you had to pay a fee for reasons that remain totally unclear to access. and said, this is public information. these are public legal documents. but the very -- there's something to transgresses ive about the act of seizing and doing it. it's in such a different category than the kinds of actions that 99% of the population feel they're able to do. and i think it's tlehreatening people. it's clearly threatening to the state, i think. when you think about anonymous and bradley manning, i'm not saying they're in the same category but what unites them is they have the ability because of this technical know-how to do an end-around the obstacles. how did aaron see his actions in that light? >> you know, a lot of people have categoryized aaron's actions as civil disobedience. aaron never had a chance to make his case at trial and the government's legal case was very thin. the documents are actually under protective order. hopefully that with be lifted

soon so everybody can see exactly how thin the case was. aaron didn't feel he had committed a crime. aaron felt he had found a loophole and that it was -- you know, the laws around these things are obsolete, they're outdated, they don't keep up with the technical know-how and capacity of people like aaron. and he felt like he was doing something disruptive but not something illegal. >> many of the things aaron did as a software developer were aimed at trying to make it easier for people to reach information. and here he had those special tools to make it easier to reach stuff which is not covered by copyright, these federal cases. >> but, larry, i know you and i are friends. you're a harvard law professor. you run an ethics center. you're kind of -- the law's important to you and you're not a particularly transgresses ive individual in terms of your disposition. i wonder how you see these kind of actions, in what light you see them. do you understand the way that people find them to auger some kind of chaotic future in which

hackers can just do whatever they want? >> no, i understand the fear. and, you know, let's be clear. there are plenty of crackers out there who are using this same kind of knowledge to do enormous damage. people steal credit cards, people who steal identity, people who crack into government databases, they are breaking laws that legitimately need to be prosecuted. i think the problem is the computer laws aaron were being prosecuted under were written in a way that required we have the ability to trust the government. they were written this a way that basically said, if you do anything that's against what the website wants you to do, you've potentially committed a felony. and the idea was, we would trust the government to cese out the difference between someone stealing citibank's credit card list and somebody releasing, you know, open access information to academic journalists. what we've seen is we can't trust the government. what we've seen is, the government can't tell the difference between somebody

releasing all the credit cards that citibank has and somebody releasing the harvard law review or downloading harvard law review for whatever purpose. this is forcing us to try to figure out what can we do to actually create the conditions where we don't have to rely upon the good sense of federal prosecutors? because they've shown us they don't have good sense in this context. >> you know, one of the things we're calling for in that context is reform of the computer fraud and abuse act. which is the law under which aaron was charged, some of these counts. one of the things that is unclear about it right now, for instance, is that it might mean that every -- any time you break the terms of service on a website, you know, that thing -- >> no one ever reads and you say, i agree. >> if you did try to read it, it would take weeks out of your life every year. any time you violate any clause in that, which companies can change at any time at their own discretion, you would be committing a federal felony. >> right. essentially a private agreement between you as a party and the

website as a party actually has the -- like the state can enforce your just sort of, you know, disregarding it and, of course, no one reads those anyway. lawrence lchltd essig, harvard law school professor. i appreciate you getting up and joining us. thank you. what do we know now we didn't know last week?

so what do you know this week that you didn't know last week? we know that real filibuster reform will not be coming to the united states senate. we know that in the last few years the senate has ground to a halt as the filibuster has been in unprecedented frequency. we know that the number of senate bills passed is the historical low. and we know that the obstruction of nominees is to bad that the president had to recess a point to the printer. and we know that senators representing 10% of americans

can kill any bill or nomination. we know that in 2011 a few far sided progressors edadvocated t change the rules that would have requi required those who are fill be busting to hold the floor and talk and they were ignored by the fellow democrats. with know that harry reid himself said that ignoring the calls for reform was one of the biggest gets and only we thought we knew that there were enough votes to pass genuine reform in the caucus, but we know that won't happen as harry reid struck a gentleman's agreement to alter slightly some of the worst procedural abuses. we know that whatever changes there are, are due to the activists and the organizers and the senators who agitated for them. with we don't know why in his heart of hearts harry reid did what he did. he told ezra klein, i'm not personally at this stage ready to get rid of the 60-vote threshold and with the history of the senate, we have to understand that the senate isn't and should not be like the house. we know that anyone who has been

in the senate as long as reid is will be an institutionalist and inclined to hold the threshold and many senators don't want to vote that much, because every vote means to have to declare a position and choose between interests, and so every time you vote, you alienate people, and make your job harder. we know that harry reid said if these reforms do not end the gridlock in washington, we will consider more in the future, but we have absolutely no reason to believe him, but we know that if people are organizing around the issue, it won't matter what is in harry reid's heart of hearts, be but the filibuster days are numbered and we are fighting over what the ending is. and we will begin with my guests to know what do you know this week that you didn't know last week. begin with mike peska? >> well, we talked about the head trauma in the nfl and so i want to pull a flea-flicker and talk about poetry. in the poem, blanco was described as the first immigrant and first gay man to read a poem

and i celebrate all of the nouns except for the word poem. it was not a poem. it was a little bit of prose, and good prose with line breaks, a and this is okay. but what i learned is that when i expressed those opinions on twitter, man, did i get slammed as a fill stein and someone who only likes limericks and needs to have things rhyme which is not true, but what i learned is that we care passionately about poetry. >> i love richard blanco and i disagree as that is prose. >> and we learned something timeless from the president that it is government's role to stand up against the ethic that might makes right. following up on the section of public access, we learned that thestional institutes of health as a requirement to get funding that you post your articles and research to post it online and make it available and that should be across the government. >> yes. tom? >> i learned that i learned that the talk that followed 2008

about the gop soul searching followed with the 2009 soul searching is still overrated. virginia is trying to reform the way it nominates and puts forward the electorate for president, and make it so that the rural populations which coincidentally are less hispanic, and black and asian will have more power. after barack obama won virginia twice, this is a national plan which yet the gop has endorsed and instead of trying to convince people who don't look like them to vote for them, they are just trying to change the game. if i don't win, you cheat. >> and there is a line that the party has decided to resolve the party and elect another. tarin. >> i learned a lot about the criminal justice system. aaron was offered a plea deal and turned it down. only 3% of all cases in the criminal justice system, and 3% go to trial, and we think of our criminal justice system as all of the rights and the constitutional rights and the

jury of the pierceers, but it it up so nobody does that, and so when you take a plea deal, you lose your right to appeal. >> the whole sthing a massive machine to produce pleas. i thank my panel. thanks for getting "up" and thank you for joining us today. and join us tomorrow here at 8:00. see you then. pply costs down... and down. use your maxperks card and get a 10-ream case of officemax multiuse paper for just 4.99 after maxperks rewards. find thousands of big deals now... at officemax. sven gets great rewards for his small business! how does this thing work? oh, i like it! [ garth ] sven's small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! woo-hoo!!! so that's ten security gators, right? put them on my spark card! why settle for less? testing hot tar...

great businesses deserve great rewards! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet? here's your invoice.